IN THE HIGH COURT OF KARNATAKA AT BENGALURU DATED THIS THE 29^TH DAY OF OCTOBER, 2025 BEFORE THE HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ WRIT PETITION NO. 30132 OF 2025 (GM-RES)

BETWEEN:

MRS. SHOBHA W/O MR K K PRAKASAN, AGED ABOUT 45 YEARS, NO. 62, 3^RD CROSS, KODANDARAMPURAM, MALLESWARAM, BANGALORE 560003 …PETITIONER (BY SRI. SHAILESH KUMAR R., ADVOCATE)

AND:

THE BRANCH MANAGER JANA SMALL FINANCE BANK, HSR LAYOUT, NO. 140L, 5^TH MAIN 6^TH SECTOR, BANGALORE 560034 Digitally signed by SHWETHA RAGHAVEND RA …RESPONDENT Location: HIGH COURT OF (BY SRI. MAHABALESHWAR CHITRIGEMATH., ADVOCATE)

KARNATAKA THIS WRIT PETITION IS FILED UNDER ARTICLES 226 AND 227 OF THE CONSTITUTION OF INDIA PRAYING TO ISSUE A WRIT OF MANDAMUS, TO DIRECT THE RESPONDENT BANK PEMIT THE PETITIONER TO OPERATE HUSBAND A/CS WHICH IS DENIED BY THE BANK VIDE LETTER DATED 07.08.2025 ANNEXURE-J AND ETC. THIS WRIT PETITION, COMING ON FOR ORDERS, THIS DAY, ORDER WAS MADE THEREIN AS UNDER:

CORAM: HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE SURAJ GOVINDARAJ

ORAL ORDER

1. The petitioner is before this Court seeking for the following reliefs:

A. Issue a writ of mandamus, to direct the respondent bank permit the petitioner to operate husband A/c’s which is denied by the bank vide letter dated 07.08.2025 Annexure-J.

B. Grant such other relief or relief’s that this Hon’ble Court deems fit to grant in the circumstances of the case in the interest of justice and equity.

2. The petitioner's husband was having Savings and Current accounts with the respondent bank for last several years which was being operated by the husband of the petitioner on a sole signatory basis. Unfortunately, the husband of the petitioner, due to certain health issues more particularly high blood pressure, went into a coma and was hospitalised on

09.09.2024.

3. It is in that background that the petitioner made a request to the respondent bank to permit her to operate the account. Since the account being operated on a sole authorization basis, the family is left without any recourse and though funds are available in the bank accounts, they are unable to use the same for the benefit of the family and for the treatment of the husband/account holder. The said request not having been accepted, the petitioner is before this Court seeking for the aforesaid relief.

4. The relationship between the petitioner and the account holder is not in dispute. The fact of the account holder being in coma is also not in dispute. The medical documents produced clearly and categorically indicate the same. It is also not in dispute that the petitioner is looking after the well being of the account holder and for the said purpose there is a requirement to make payment of large sums of money to the hospital as also monies are required for the upkeep of the family. The account holder was the sole breadwinner of the family.

5. These aspects not being in dispute, there being no particular objection by anyone else as regards the petitioner's request for operating the bank account, I am of the considered opinion that the respondent bank can be directed to permit the petitioner to operate the said accounts by obtaining necessary indemnity deeds from the petitioner and or complying with any other formalities. As such, I pass the following:

ORDER

i) The Writ Petition is allowed ii) The respondent bank is directed to permit the petitioner to operate the account of her husband and withdraw amounts required for medical treatment and the upkeep of the family from time to time by obtaining necessary indemnity deed and or certain other documents as may be required under law.

SD/-

(SURAJ GOVINDARAJ)

JUDGE PRS List No.: 1 Sl No.: 108